Question: Does a parent that does not pay child support when court ordered to do so deserve to see their child?

Sarah - posted on 05/23/2012 ( 201 moms have responded )

9

20

0

I know that this question is going to cause a major fuss in responses, however I am still going to ask. If a parent is supposed to pay child support and falls behind on paying child support (I am not talking a couple of weeks or even months, I am talking years upon years upon years behind) should the custodial parent be allowed to say no you may not see your child, you won't support them so why should you be allowed to reap the benefits? Let me know your opinion....also please keep it polite, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

[deleted account]

Child support and visitation are completely separate issues in most places and there is a very good reason for that. Assuming the father is not abusive, since you have not stated such, withholding visitation punishes TWO people, not one- your ex AND your child. A child desperately needs a relationship with their father, and that relationship is between the two of them. As the previous post mentioned, if daddy has been physically involved and you interfere with that, your child will miss that relationship that was clearly there before and wonder on some level what happened. When the questions come you of course have options. You can say nothing, i.e. play dumb, leaving your child to simply feel abandoned by someone they love and hurt and confused as to the whys. You can lie, which your child will almost definitely figure out eventually and resent you. Or you can tell your child the truth, putting him/her in the middle and causing him/her to shoulder the emotional burden of finances alongside you...finances that your child will understand at some point as a direct result of him/herself, and feel unfairly guilty and torn between parents. Any psychologist in the world would likely tell you that parents have no business talking to the child about child support and where or how the other parent falls short. And where there is no mistreatment, no parent has any business coming between a child's relationship with the other parent. A child is not a financial investment from which you "reap the benefits." That child is entitled to an opportunity at a healthy relationship with BOTH parents. Should daddy be forced to help provide for his child? Absolutely! Should mom use the only "leverage" she has—the child—to punish dad, also inadvertently punishing said child? Never! That child needs a relationship with their father and it is not their fault if the father isn't paying. The child shouldn't be made by one parent to pay for what the other parent does wrong. Withholding visitations (when the child is not being harmed) is NOT in your child's best interest emotionally, nor is it fair to your child. Please consider that point, for your child's sake. I have seen a couple situations like that, up close and personal, and the emotional damage caused to the child is extensive, when the person the mom was really trying to hurt was the dad. Child support can and should be enforced by the courts.



I would also venture to flip some details and ask ultimately the same question from the other side:

I have come across many stay at home single moms, who live off nothing more than their child support checks and any family and/or government help they can get. So in those cases, should custody be taken from mom and full, sole legal and physical custody be given to the dad with no visitations for the mom? I mean the mom technically isn't contributing one cent of her own money to support her child...why should she "reap the benefits" of getting to spend everyday with her child, right? (Again, I don't personally subscribe to this logic for EITHER parent.) Just food for thought...

Jodi - posted on 05/23/2012

26,465

36

3891

My child is not a commodity nor available for rent. By telling a parent they cannot see their child unless they pay, that is exactly how you are treating your child.

Michelle - posted on 05/24/2012

8,526

8

3223

Like Jodi has said, your child isn't a commodity to hold as ransom for payment. Why punish the child because Dad can't be bothered to pay support? Is it the child's fault that he is their Father?

You need to put aside your frustrations and anger over the situation be happy that he does want to spend time with his child. Some children don't get that at all.

Dove - posted on 05/23/2012

6,369

0

1337

Absolutely not. Granted, I think it royally sucks when the non custodial parent doesn't think they should pay to support THEIR children, but children should not be used as pawns... especially over money.

This conversation has been closed to further comments

201 Comments

View replies by

Marie - posted on 07/11/2012

97

0

4

Fact Cannot have the Party or enjoy one if you cannot keep the Promise. The promise in a Marriage is to be faithful in all things, then work out those things BEFORE USING divorce as a tool in the first place.



Fact:, DIVORCE IS LIKE A DEATH TO A CHILD: Thus the Child is hurt already the damage is done



Jennifer say don't hurt the relationship over the money?? if it was that simple because of money , there would be no break ups. And couple don't plan to hurt their own well most.



Um since there are "many reasons why people break up in the first place, its not always over money all break up, more often infidelity and on on are bigger issues.



Simply people are pretty selfish to think a divorce solves their adult problems, it doe's not.



Gezze other than defat o relationships, why enter into a solemn vow such as a Marriage vows, if people don't have any idea what they are vowing to do for each other? they may as well, just have the party, with out the Promise.



Think:

UNFAITHFULNESS< hurts more Children and relationships, than having no money any way, um I have seen VERY havePoorer people who have strong marriages, who DONT focus on expensive THINGS, and Value relationships Better! why?(( because their foundations are built on Better Values)) Once married you are not or should not be living for SELF>



Not about been perfect rather been Honest.



People have lost there way on what Marriage is all about. Get back to basics and get them right, then some may have beater chance else don't take the Vows to DO something, you may not want to do later ( eg : to have to Pay)even if it does not work.

Marie - posted on 07/11/2012

97

0

4

The light side, Then again seems that woman can be a bad influence the new relations so they for men should all become monks ! thus they never have to worry about responsibility in this real world.


Facts remain its both men and woman that should communicate better for ALL the child's needs, as any separation divorce regardless of $ does effect a child emotional life for ever.

So trying to act one one or another, will never change the hurt divorce does bring into a child a live. One does not have to with hold any thing for this fact to be.

People should want to be counseled in the first palace as to why they feel to get married. As marriage is for better or worse, just that how much the word worse others can take.

Its good to have other interests for a marriage to work. I have seem many people start of good, have their kids, kids grow up, then parents don't know each other, as they had not other outside interests , and lost there way as to say in the marriage , does not have to be a nasty marriage for it to not work out,, just lack of good communications often always the key, unless one has been unfaithful.

I am some what old fashion, kept our values and this as serve us well in our Marriage.

I take part in everything out doors as well, guys like to have a partner in their marriage. Look I am a pretty blunt person specially when children are involved BUT this does not come with out yrs of experience, and watching many relations ships crumble and die out, or many life in denial, where they could have been saved! thus avoidance is better than some cures.

Money no money what ever, kids learn to Love life and laugh most (when both parents are together share all, and thus truly Happy.

This world has simply become more impersonal , and selfish,

But there is Hope for those who once confess in their vows for better or some truly believe in what they are saying. Else don't take the vows.

thats it from me -:)...

Marie - posted on 07/11/2012

97

0

4

The original topic here was written by, (Sarah Collins) who did not clarify a lot., but see all have different experiences.



This not about when people have good communications and understanding of responsibility rather ones that are simply for no reason refuses to pay.



Yes exs should simply stay out of others children's Mothers life's and her childs. But then there always the jealously with the new woman in these triangles of these relationships and Loyalties.



Parenting is not for push overs. And have no idea what Klyee up back here, is saying , when she criticizes the BIO Mum who has taken on all the responsibility, but father thought it could simply get a passport, when he has not paid $9,000! for child support, thats really la la land.

So what he drinks and has a problem, that problem which no doubt has already effected his child, reason of break up in the first place , Da! lest he's learn a hard lesson, as life does teach all we guess, who feel they can father kids with out paying.



Pity does not change bad to good, Action to get up and get a job and pay does, as most adults do. even seeing a parent is paying something every week here, better that NEVER PAYING IN YRS!



Advocate for kids first no matter what! Kids should not be disadvantage in any way because of irresponsible parenting, this means financial as well!

Marie - posted on 07/11/2012

97

0

4

Kylee darling do you have children yet to your fiancee as I did not see this in your comment lines?, fact remains If the Mother of her own flesh and blood, is paying for ALL and everything for her own child/ren, she is not playing mummies and daddies, she is 100% REALLY a responsible parent, thus she is the BOSS as you put it -:) and to try and undermine the responsible parent in all of this, would be a grave mistake on your part.

I think you are only one sided, as you are in love of lust with her ex, of corse you will be jealous of your new mans ex. I think it was great the Law sticks up for children's side and those who are really paying for everything, and anyone had to pay back what he owed $9000 ! wow do you think he could simply get a passport and have fun and freedom where ever? So obviously the Law got that right for you mans ex child great !

Kylee, Are you more annoyed because you also may be asked or feel pressured, by your ex to pay for his exs wee girl? this is their problem when people jump into relationships when others messed are not tidied up before they leave each other and where there is no concrete understanding of what each person MUST PAY for their own child, you just pick up others responsibilities, you never made, and if you are happy with that fine, what else do you expect? for the Mother to roll over and say hey dear don't worry about the $9,000 you owe, just keeping presents? um Lap tops and expensive Presents don't feed and cloth children, relatives can buy presents, parents MUST pay for childs up bring , full stop.

And give up with the Boohoos for your mans problem, as still does not get him of his responsibilities of Child support, why should any child suffer, because of a Adults problem. may be why wife left him in the first place.

Lisa - posted on 07/11/2012

27

3

0

As I said in a previous post... my ex hasn't paid child support for 10 years. I won't go into all the reasons, but greatest influence on his decision seems to have been his new wife. Whatever. He's still my children's Dad and THEY deserve the opportunity to see him and know him.



My decision to buy them plane tickets twice a year to visit with him has ZERO to do with what my ex deserves and EVERYTHING to do with what my CHILDREN deserve. He does not support them financially. He DOES support them emotionally and that means a lot to them AND me.



What's funny is that in all these years, I've never said a bad word about him or his wife. But the kids come home from every visit liking him and his wife less and less. Apparently, a favorite topic of dinner conversation up there is what a horrible mother I am (although, in all fairness, most of it seems to come from the mouth of the wife! LOL)



She even had a problem with him coming down here to visit the kids without her because she was worried I'd lure him back into my bed! LOL She even went so far as to scream at him on the phone while they were all at one of our high school football games.... loud enough that my son heard her ridiculous accusations.



You reap what you sow, people. You reap what you sow.

Marie - posted on 07/11/2012

97

0

4

Whats is soo frustrating is the lack of Responsibility in the first place to feel they don't want to pay, but then that person can simply live a free life.

And as far as new girlfriends in a Fathers life who already has REAL responsibilities to pay for his ex Mrs,children . the new girl friend should simply stay out of ex wife's business of her children, as non of her business.

Marie - posted on 07/11/2012

97

0

4

REALITY CHECK,takes $ to bring up a child, and the Father is only paying for presents and expensive lap tops as some own as mentioned back up here, as reality wrong priorities BY NOT PAYING ANY CHILD SUPPORT, needs a good shake up! $9,000 ! wake up pay back cost what ot takes to bring up a a child/ren. , if you have moneys to spend on lavish presents.



No proof here this Father is the best dad either.

No proof as to why he has not paid for YEARS!



And YUP, good that you cannot skip the country if you are not paying for what you have Created in this world , a real human being that the other parent paying for ALL its needs, what if they dod not want to pay? would no doubt child be taken of from both parents and then Governments take over all rights from both squabbling parents, so how ever parent is pay for everything, well guess yes THEY ARE THE BOSS IF THEY HAVE MORE CUSTODY AND CARE OVER THEY OWN CHILD!. Gezze suck it up,and grow and just Pay up I say. ( IF for no other Health reason you cannot pay) like legs and arms chopped off, that you cannot work, or brain inquired, um what other reason is there here? would be because of BAD attitude, and unresolved differences between a couple.



And no little hussy that steps into a relations with a Father that already has children to some one else, should that then father more kids to his new squeeze if he wont or cannot pay for his others kids! um.



Its simply. non for the new girlfriends business to criticize the Ex for all her hard work and paying for everything what its cost to bring up a child/ren,, , because that guy does not want to work out difference with his ex, and pay UP.



So NO its not about been boss, or using kids as Pawns, no REAL Mother or father would ever do this, However its the REALITY of been resosibly parents, you must pay at some time and back pay yes of Corse,if needed for a child/ren NEEDS.

Marie - posted on 07/11/2012

97

0

4

PS : Yes yes the law says this and that, great for the Law, BUT REALITY STANDS ITS THE MUM WHOS PAYING all the Bills here, AS SHE WOULD NOT HAVE MADE ANY COMMENT HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE IF SHE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THE FATHER> does the Law then need to pay her bills? Does the Tax payer YOU ( if you are a tax payer) need to pay for all the failing parents children? um.. what does that teach children?



while having Laws we have to live and some times works, often the Laws is often a ASS, because funny that someone may say they have no money to pay for a child's up bring, then Adults they have rights to have Legal fees to GET their own rights? Bit of hypocrisy there.





Either parent or not, but don't expect to never pay :) and then expect the system to, thats the point.

Marie - posted on 07/11/2012

97

0

4

Children are not feed by a non paying parent, thus money is a reality for been able to bring up children unless you live on a different planet. It takes Adults to feed children and not children to work for the lack of a Parent to bring up them selves.

Pawn?? This is going round in circles and getting no where , so last time , Um, as there are NO details as to why this person has not payed ever for years! EG: as I have already said before, if the have they not paid because of their own Health can cannot work then can see not this person fault? oHow ever if its a matter of simply a dead beat dad( or Mum) however sad as it is in this case its the Dad that has ((not paid for years!)) with as to no reason why not, so more facts would be ALOT more clearer.

Its getting more facts straight in this story,not just as simply to say any parent as the right to access, rather they should PROVE they can pay for a child's needs.

Thats the problem with this sad world, when it comes to Children, adults feel they have more rights to access , (((even if they don't want to share all the responsibility? um very imbalanced))

no this is about responsible parenting, if one show does not give a dam to pay what they have brought in this world , ((then its they who has already hurt their own child)) not the one who is left will all the bills, as the one who does snot pay,they have made their own child rights less privilege to be able to the clothed and feed and all the most basics necessities in life, ( Specially Health care, dentist work ) Who should pay for this, YOU?


Its about been accountable for your responsibilities, and if some one is not willing for no reason to pay, then they should not have any right to assume just because they where the sperm donor , makes them the parent thats actual doing everything, but in reality NOT. get it?

IN THE END THIS COUPLE SHOULD TALK AND BOTH PAY FOR WHAT THEY HAVE BROUGHT INTO THIS WORLD, AND IF THE FATHER IS SO NICE THEN WHY NOT BE NICER AND PAY FOR THEIR OFFSPRING? Rather than give half the story.

Jennifer - posted on 07/10/2012

4

27

0

Child support and visitation are two very different ways to suport a child. One if financial and the other is physical and emotional. There are varying reasons as to why someone may fall behind in child support (the financial support) as well as numerous reasons to cut off visitation. However, you always need to keep what is best for the child in the for front of each decision. If someone cannot pay the court order support because of loss of job or other life reasons that needs to be addressed by the court and the non custodial parent needs to figure out how to contribute to the financial well being of his child. That being said. If a non custodial parent is in deed a good parent that loves the child and is requesting visitation to support that child in a physical and emotional way then it is in the childs best interest to continue to have visitation with that parent. Don't hurt their relationship over money, let the court handle the money issue and you keep encouraging your child to grow and learn how important real relationships are and that both of their parents do care about them.

In short when you start using your child as a pawn over money the only one that really hurts is your child.

Kylee - posted on 07/10/2012

2

0

0

I wouldn't depend it on that. God, America is corrupt... dont base it off of them being a good human being or anything it's always all about the benjamins. It's just money. I'm with a guy that has a daughter with an exwife. He buys that daughter laptops, and takes her to do stuff, and pays for whatever she wants basically.. that he can afford. And actually, he owes his ex $9,000 of back child support because he USED to be a little out of control in his younger years. So he has debt and fines and rent and a new baby and an expensive fiance to pay for... does this mean he shouldn't be able to see his daughter b/c he cant make up for how he used to be, at this moment? Did you know you cant get a passport if you owe child support? Well we just found that out because were getting married in Sept out of the country- got denied. UNLESS he pays it off or his ex-wife writes a letter saying she doesn't want that back-money. She wrote a letter, didn't even think twice about it. Ex-girls need to be more chill, they usually just want to get back at their ex-man thru money or dangling children in front of them. Trying to be a boss, and its ridiculous. There are reasons why people can't pay certain things... they have lives too.. live they got behind in and are trying to get back to a stable situation again.
I really don't even get how anybody would even think that this question is reasonable... So if I was to break up with my fiance, and even though he was the best dad but owed me money.. I shouldn't let him see her??? lol.. stupid. Never would even cross my mind. UNLESS he was being a bad influence to my daughter, or I feared for her safety... then of coarse I would care. Its all about exs trying to be in control. Anyone that doesn't let their kids see both of their parents for any other reason than bad influence or fear ofr safety... they need to a get a clue. It's only hurting your children, not knowing both their parents gives them confusion of who they really are when they are older and finding themselves. If it was you, wouldn't you want to see both of your parents- (if safe to) and not just determined on what that person can afford or what that person may think is right or wrong. Maybe momma cheated, maybe daddy feels like "she cheated on me, I dont have to pay"... "maybe daddy has been sober for 6 years, and is still trying to get to a stable place to re-start his life." Called common sense, and discernment people. IT'S MONEY! Put yourself in someone else's shoes for two minutes and quit just looking and how you want new ones.

Aimee - posted on 07/10/2012

7

0

0

I agree, if he's behind in his support, he shouldn't have the right to take the child. But unfortunately, according to the courts, the two are separate issues and we are not supposed to keep the "dad' from the children. Can we please lobby or something to get the laws changed and be universal across the nation????

Chaya - posted on 07/09/2012

737

0

229

Deadbeat is one thing, unemployed due to illness, injury, economic downturn, terrorist action, etc, is quite another. If my daughters dad refused to pay child support I probably wouldn't let him see her, largely because he wants me to take him back, I'm tired of the pursuit, daughter is tired of his putting her in the middle.. If he couldn't, and afore mentioned issues weren't, he could see her all they agreed to. I feel bad for you,if I were in your shoes, I'd move and leave no forewarding address, but that's probably not an option for you.

Jenn - posted on 07/09/2012

675

1

47

Okay, here is similar stories but different spin.

My aunt and uncle raise their grandchild. The mother, perfectly employed and living with a boyfriend, age 28, is supposed to pay child support. My aunt has been raising the child since she was one...she is now 8. The mother rarely calls, hasn't paid child support in YEARS and yet once in a blue moon pops in for some Mommy n Me time with her daughter. The poor child has been in therapy because she adores her mother and can't understand why her mom doesn't want to raise her or doesn't come around nearly often enough. Makes me sick! Yet the child support is completely separate in the eyes of the court.

Not all parents who owe child support are bad people, obviously. Some seriously are cash strapped. However, I think it should be case by case. For those who have abusive ex-partners, that is a whole other issue entirely and has nothing to do with child support or lack thereof. That is very serious and document! Document! Document! Then drag their ass to court!

I feel so sad for all the children effected by divorce or nasty separations. Heartbreaking and children are so very aware of it all!

Elizabeth - posted on 07/09/2012

99

6

6

NO. deadbeat parents should not have the right to reap the benefits of parenthood or even have the option of criticizing a child's mistakes if they do not accept and fulfill the responsibility of being a parent. And I have very good reasons for feeling this way. I have had to deal with my brother and sister in law for years now while I raised their boys.

Kristi - posted on 07/07/2012

1,355

3

78

So, let's put the shoe on the other foot for a second, what about the parent who pays her support for almost 18 years and has had her child with held on and off for the first 10 and completely since then? And yes, I have standard, non-custodial visitation ordered. No, I used all of my and my parents money getting my daughter away from my abusive ex-husband.



Me. -> -> -> Shit creek. No Boat. No Paddle. No Son. : (





ETA: My ex-husband hasn't, doesn't and won't ever pay a nickel. But that has never been the reason I have kept her from him. In fact, at first, I didn't keep her from him. Once he proved the death threats were just threats because of the split, then I let him see her again. (a year later)

Stephanie - posted on 07/07/2012

1

0

0

Well said Nicole! I could not have said it better! Finally some one in this world has some common sence! Every child will always need Mom and Dad. No kind of money will ever comfort a child like the relationship between the child and his/her parents..

Jessica - posted on 07/07/2012

11

0

2

My ex doesn't pay his child support, and as much as I would sometimes like to say to him...I don't think you should see our son until you help support him. I can't. My son has a relationship with his Dad. He loves his Dad, and I can see that whenever I drop him off for visitation. I could never take that away from my son. I have told my ex though that as far as I am concerned he should help financially support the child he helped make. It has caused many angry words. At this point in time, he doesn't care. He's still bitter about the "break-up", and that's fine...it will all catch up in the end.

Dawn - posted on 07/06/2012

33

18

0

@Jodi, I've ask the exact same question and never received an answer. I think that most of these women that are saying the father should not see the child are still upset about the break up, and that is what the real issue is. Many women seem to think it's ok i they go on with their lives, have more kids, new relationships etc. yet expect their ex not to. I also asked how many women out there could support two families? No answer to that either.

Jodi - posted on 07/05/2012

26,465

36

3891

"Not all single moms are on welfare"

I'm a little confused as to who suggested all single mothers were on welfare????
I was saying that NO parent on welfare should have their children if the theory is that parents should be able to support their kids or not see them. But no-one has said anything about single mothers on welfare.

Lisa - posted on 07/05/2012

27

3

0

Nope. Deadbeat or not, the CHILD has a right to see his or her parent.



Your financial issues are ADULT issues that have nothing whatsoever to do with the relationship between a parent and child.



And for the record... My ex hasn't paid child support for my youngest 2 children in nearly 10 years. I STILL buy them plane tickets so they can go spend time with their Dad and the rest of their family every summer.



He's a deadbeat and they know it. But they still love him and his family. I would NEVER want to be the one that taught them to feel bad about the person that helped bring them into this world. And you know what? He IS a deadbeat, but he LOVES his kids.

Chaya - posted on 07/05/2012

737

0

229

Not all single moms are on welfare, I work, I'm probably not in the minority. I know a lot of people who are single parents who have university degrees

Jodi - posted on 07/05/2012

26,465

36

3891

" if the parent that is suppose to be paying child support doesnt and says they cant afford to feed and cloth the child, then they shouldnt be able to afford 2012 vehicles and concerts and bail and everything else that they want. "



Like I said, we should take kids off all the people on welfare who can't afford those things, give up everything and still can't support their kids then, right? Because I'm not sure where this OP mentioned that this father was spending his money on all sorts of other stuff. Maybe some fathers really just can't afford it as well as supporting themselves? You must be talking about a specific person (maybe your ex), but not all fathers who can't pay child support are like that. So putting a blanket rule that if they can't support their kids, they shouldn't be able to see them, well maybe people on welfare who can't afford to support their kids shouldn't see their kids either? Not so keen on that rule now, are you?

Nichole - posted on 07/05/2012

7

0

2

if the parent that is suppose to be paying child support doesnt and says they cant afford to feed and cloth the child, then they shouldnt be able to afford 2012 vehicles and concerts and bail and everything else that they want. a good parent will go without so that their children can eat and be happy. id give up everything if it was keeping me from supporting my child.

Jodi - posted on 07/05/2012

26,465

36

3891

"If some one says oh cannot pay to feed and cloth a child of their own, then how do they do this when child by Law has the right to be with parent that supposing pleads to have no money?"

And again, should parents who rely on welfare for help to feed their children have their children removed then? They can't afford them either.

Marie - posted on 07/05/2012

97

0

4

Um Yes very well said, Nichole Evans,

If some one says oh cannot pay to feed and cloth a child of their own, then how do they do this when child by Law has the right to be with parent that supposing pleads to have no money?

Wether the Law says this or that, does not make it right any one should have a child they cannot feed or cloth. as no doubt there are real reason and concerns they don't have full custody in the first place. else no need for all of this.

Nichole - posted on 07/05/2012

7

0

2

Personally I dont think that they should be allowed to them. . if he cant afford to help take care of them when they dont live with him how is he suppose to take care of them when they are with him. But the lawyers have told me it doesnt matter if he dont pay he still gets to see them unless i take him back to court

Margaret - posted on 07/05/2012

5

2

0

Honestly, I don't know how a parent can look into their child's eyes when they know they are doing absolutely nothing to provide for them.

Sue - posted on 07/05/2012

6

0

0

I dont think the have the right if they dont want to help support the child but court ses it the other way around. Court think everyone has the right to see their kid and they cant be prevented from seeing him despite CS being paid or not. However, $$ can be garnished right from thier pay, sign the paperwork to get that done. If he doesnt comply then he can go to jail.

Sharlene - posted on 07/04/2012

3,896

241

785

Can you take your ex back to court ot fight for the child support owing . By law you can't stop your ex seeing his child , sorry

Chaya - posted on 07/04/2012

737

0

229

You may be able to have his wages garnished, in some states, you can arrange for him to loose drivers and professional licences. Not suggesting you should be vindictive, but if that's what it takes. He'll get mad at you, so you won't see him for a while, but if you're not together, let someone else have him, your mom probably always taught you to give your used toys to the less fortunate

Karen - posted on 07/04/2012

1

15

0

My husband has the opposite problem. He pays child support and his ex wont let him see his child.

User - posted on 07/04/2012

1

0

0

That is a hard one. I think that if the child wants to see them, maybe you should but if the child shows no concern probably not.

Lacye - posted on 07/04/2012

889

0

221

If you have visitation set up by the court system, you cannot tell your ex he can't see his child. He can file contempt of court on you just like you can file charges on him for not paying child support. You don't have a choice to "allow" him to see his child. Not only can you get in trouble legally, it doesn't really make you any better than him if you play the "no pay, no kid" card. Your child is a person too and has every right to see her father.

Alex - posted on 07/03/2012

23

0

1

My mother went through this with me. No he does not deserve to see his child if he can not even provide for this child. Unless your kid genuinely wants to see him, I would say no.

Valarie - posted on 07/03/2012

1

0

0

Should they be morally and should they be legally are two different things. Morally I would say no. But if the court has granted visitation you are going to get yourself in trouble by not following the order. Best thing to do is to take him back to court for a modification of the visitation and also to address the back support. I know in our state they you can request that the court put the collection of the child support through an agency that will attach his wages and send the payment directly to you as well as adding on a bit more each month to start working away at the back support. You just need to remember to be the bigger person in this matter because the judge will look at that too.

Chaya - posted on 07/02/2012

737

0

229

It depends on the laws where you live. I wouldn't let my ex see my daughter,( not child support related, ) and the courts agreed with me. Speak to a lawyer in your area, they have better information than I.

Marie - posted on 07/02/2012

97

0

4

Seems like alot of useless dads may be the woman may choice better father material next time.

Or simply stop complaining ,and do with out them, if they have no intention to cough up.



Regardless if t its a father or Mother not paying what they ought, No respect for any child, if you are not gong to be 100% responsible, what doe that teach any child in return.



And if their was no Welfare State, and Tax payers stood up to say NO to paying for others kids to live , because of a few loser parents/ fathers what ever wont pa or to lazy to work, then more kids would be on the street, simple.



No pay, no play simple. As kids have already lost out because of X2 bickering parents.

Danielle - posted on 07/02/2012

8

20

0

This is not about what is fair between parents or about what one parent deserves or does not deserve. This is about a child's right to maintain a relationship with both parents. This is about a child's future sense of self, of security, of family, of trust. This is about putting your child's needs first, before any desire for revenge or even justice. If, regardless of financial contributions (or lack thereof), it is in the child's best interest to see their non-custodial parent, then it is your duty as their custodial parent to do everything within reason to make that happen, and in as positive an environment as possible. Yes, this reality sucks, is unfair, and difficult - I know because I am doing it. But it's not about you or your former partner, this is about your child that relies on you to make decisions that are in there best interest. Always. Best wishes!

Amy - posted on 07/02/2012

55

0

2

I agree, everyone is entitled to their own opinion so here is mine. I believe that as long as the other parent is not abusive in any way toward the child, they should be allowed to see them. Both parents are important in a child's life regardless of whether or not they are both financially supportive. Think about it this way, you are allowing the visits because it's in the best interest of your child, not because the other parent deserves it. Make the visits supervised and set rules and boundaries for them and make them around your schedule, not his. If he is really interested in visiting with your child he will show up when and where you say. Also if it is costly to plan and make it to a visit, make him pay for it. Even if he can't/won't be financially supportive on a regular basis (for whatever reason), he should still be held accountable for paying for the visits. If he really wants to be there he WILL find a way to make it and if he doesn't it's his loss.

Kayla - posted on 06/30/2012

15

0

0

coming from a 14 year old tht wants to have baby soon ... & if i got pregnant & he did not pay child support but till wants to see the baby .. I Would Let him because hes the father ... 7 should be allowed to ee him bt i wouldnt leave him alone & i would give him a certain amount of time to do so. if he pays the amount then he can see the child for how long he wants ...

Vickey - posted on 06/29/2012

12

1

0

If the father truly loved there child he would find away to pay child support. So in this case you need to continue to pursue the court to enforce pymt of the child support. Don't put your child in the middle. He/she is not a pawn. Every child needs both parents, unless physical or emotional abuse. Make him pay for the round trip travel until you get the support caught up and continue pymts, then split the air fare i Be responsible and pay for the care of your child. You are hurting no one except the child. He/she did not ask to be born. So act like a man and pay up. Then you have a right to see them. Don't hurt your child for the dads wrong doing. When he/she is old enough then they can make there own choice, not you or him.

Amanda - posted on 06/29/2012

14

0

0

Everyone has their own opinion in regards to this matter, but clear cut by law and by what is right regardless, as long as the father is not abusive in any way then the child will be harmed more by not seeing the father.... If the father is abusive then absolutely you should keep the child away through LEGAL channels....Other then that it is not fair to the CHILD..... yes it is very unfair that the mother has to shoulder the brunt of responsibility, but its not about what is fair or unfair to the mother its about what is best for the child.

Jodi - posted on 06/29/2012

26,465

36

3891

"JODI RE: The money is for the support towards the child, thats why its called Child support, um. "

I think you are misunderstanding what I am getting at. IF the father owes back support, then it is the MOTHER who is fully supporting the child in those years, so therefore, when the money does finally come through, it is not the child's money, it is the MOTHER'S money, because during the years where he wasn't paying it was the MOTHER'S money that was supporting the child.

Jennifer - posted on 06/28/2012

5

0

0

I personally believe that a child has the right to know both parents and form an opinion on their own. As long as the non custodial parent is not a harm to the child I believe the child has the
right to see them .
I think it is deplorable that a parent would not want to support their child wether they
have custody or not. I do not believe money should be the reason for visitation to be halted.

Stephanie - posted on 06/28/2012

2

0

0

The issue of support is completely different than visitation. He has been seeing her for years as you stated, she is attached. I cannot even understand the frustration you have towards him, but denying her to see her father will destroy her. I don't think you want to do that. Do it the right way through the courts leaving her totally out of it, even if it feels never ending. It always catches up with these type of fathers. I commend you for doing what is right for your child, and not using your child as a pawn. Good luck!

Marie - posted on 06/28/2012

97

0

4

The person who started this Original write up to who is belongs, BALANCE please everyone!



Need more elaboration, and hard facts, thus this will always go around and around no where.





JODI RE: The money is for the support towards the child, thats why its called Child support, um.



Yes its not a easy one. As even though the law can say this and that to separate Money / from visiting rights, then very clear that in some parts of the world the Law seems to work better for a parents that does not pay, but still allow benefits that they never took any responsibility in helping with.



Once again, this is NOT just a case of a few missed payments, rather than " habitually" not paying at all.





Also to other comments about Poor families etc, of corse they should not have their children taken of of them, HOWEVER, it also cannot be left to the state Government to be their "Money parents" by providing continuous copious amounts of tax payers $$. for no reasons clear in this case?





Thus its more of the " Attitude behind NOT working to pay what one is responsible for in the first place.



And YES if say $$% goes to booze, drugs, and selfish means to the parents, which means children misses out then NO they don't deserve or ch should have had children in the first place. And believe us, there are alot of cases like that around, just like they are those who are simply genuinely struggling, to make ends meet.



On the other hand because of matters, like sickness, natural Disasters that prevent RESPONSIBLE parents paying, then thats another matter.





This originally article, gave NO REASON as to WHY the Father ( in this case) was not paying for his obligation of Child Support, and had not for years???



Would be good to get a Balanced view, as to WHY he is not paying, rather than just saying he has not.



Eg Can he work? Is he Disabled preventing him to? OR just selfishly refusing to.



The original write up did not fully or has not fully explained WHY he has not, rather just point gout out had not for Years.



IF no other clear reasons...

There can still be very real emotional tensions between the X2 parents, that can effect any child/ren, just because some looser has not paid for yrs to support the child they help make in the first place.



Conclusion and my last say to this whew!

A)

In this case alone easy to see that ONE parent is at lest been responsible for everything. But X1should not take the load of someone who" PERHAPS simply may be refusing to pay due to irresponsibility.



B)

Thus is this a case of Genuinely been poor due to not be able to get work, sickness OR a case of simply refusing to be responsible and pay because money been misspent in the first place?





C) find better father or another material, before you pan to have kids!



But on the fairer side, wether you are both very responsibly sometimes LIFE throws some hard punches such as sickness etc.



This x1 story is NOT in any way very clear as it should be.



Who knows.

Amanda - posted on 06/27/2012

14

0

0

@Jessica, If that was the case then MILLIONS of children would not be allowed to see their parents..... HOW many people are on welfare????? They cant afford to take care of their children that is why they are on welfare.... so in your opinion it is better to take millions of children away from their parents because you think if they cant support their own children then they cant have them.... .

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms